Who is better: Sanchez or Hazard
- Thread starter AshRK
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
I have always suggested Sanchez was better than Hazard.
Taking his talent to the next level. It's clearly there.
I was inclined to say Hazard, but comparing their last three seasons it's not even close, overall Alexis had a much bigger impact and played significantly better since he came to the Premier League.
No he's not. It's also because Chelsea are just a superior team in general.
Yeah, stats wise Sanchez wins it. 107 mins per G+A for Sanchez vs 150 mins per G+A for Hazard, also Hazard scored 10 more penalties than Sanchez.
I wouldn't say it isn't close. But Sanchez has been better. What gives him the edge is his mentality. In a big game on the bigger stage I'd rather have Sanchez in my team.
I'd pick Hazard in general though as he's younger and has a higher ceiling.
Me too. The main reason being he scores more goals than Hazard. Hazard is a silkier dribbler and is beautiful to watch but Sanchez is more decisive.
he definitely is. they're just a far better side when he's in it.
Not all about those stats, I think Hazard is a better all-round player and much more skillfull. Just posting stats so people can come up with their own opinion. It's obviously very close regardless of the minutes per goal & assist, as the poll suggests (with Hazard getting more votes so far). I'd also like to wager that before we were interested in signing Sanchez, Hazard would've won any vote by a landslide.
However, despite whatever I say and anyone else, I'm still of the opinion that Sanchez is the better signing for our team.
End product isn't comparable because Hazard is a better playmaker.
He is 27 already, can he step up to next level at this age when elite players have all stepped up much before this age?
I think we are watching peak Hazard. His game is as good for last 3-4 years except Chelsea's bad season.
Copa America > club titlesbehave you cheeky fecker.
Ah I thought you meant his La Liga title!
I agree 100%, but since the question was "who is better" I still go for Alexis
Yeah I know, IIRC I said same in my first post. Hazard is better play maker, Sanchez is better goal scorer.
How many non-penalty goals are in that Hazard’s stat?
Sanchez is the better player every day of the week. We tend to underrate our own players a lot. Sanchez is hands down better, the only attribute Hazard has over Sanchez is dribbling.
No chance. If you have a better team in general then it is factuality incorrect to claim the attack or team is better because of one player. Chelsea are better mentally and in football ability than Arsenal. It has been the case for years and across the pitch. If Hazard was such a phenomenal player to take his team beyond what other top players can, alone, his international performance wouldn't lag far behind Sanchez's.
Also every team is "far better" with their best player.
Agreed.
I don't know the full statistics, but I believe around 13 penalties scored for Hazard. However, I would also argue that he 'won' most of those penalties
so, he has probably just sacrificed assists for goals in that regard (as you can't assist yourself). Thus, likely a similar number in overall goals + assists.No he's not. You can say he's better at keeping possession and moving the ball, but he's certainly not a better attacking playmaker. To begin with, he doesn't even try as much as Alexis
Chelsea's attack is nothing special without Hazard in it. He's definitely the reason they're better than Arsenal's. Disagree if you want but your reasoning is pretty bizarre and contradictory.
Obviously Chelsea have a better team than Arsenal because they have a better midfield and defense, comfortably, but attacking wise there's really not much in it if you take out Hazard and Sanchez. They have the exact same amount of goals scored this season and drew with each other twice!
well as roonster pointed out in terms of stats Sanchez wins it and it's not even close. He clocks 107 mins per G/A, whilst Hazard does the same scoring 10 penos more for 150 mins per g/a.
I'd definitely take Sanchez in the attacking third. Sure Hazard is the better playmaker, but as an overall impact Sanchez for me.
Hazard has been the league's best for a good while. It's only come into question this season with the form of KDB.
But Sanchez
But Sanchez
All to prove in the context of being a better premier league player than Hazard - definitely. All to prove to be remembered as an excellent EPL player no.
Right now though, a few good seasons in that Arsenal team.. if he was to come here and theoretically flop (i.e. not lead us to titles, still off the pace of title chases), would he be remembered as better than Hazard? no. So he does have it all to prove, whereas Hazard could retire tomorrow and be remembered as a genuine EPL great.
Also you're assuming I think Sanchez can't be the better player. Of course he can, in fact I can see him outperforming Hazard in the CL.. and once he adapts to United, he's a better goalscorer etc so I could see him being perceived as a more valuable asset than Hazard who I think has already hit his top level whereas Sanchez even at 29, I still think has never really been at the perfect club to really unleash his talents to his maximum.
Ask me this question in two seasons time, and I am hoping I can give a different answer and vote in favour of Sanchez. However the question is based on the here and now.
What does this even mean? In both of our recent title winning seasons he was consistently our best player most weeks. Likewise this season. He very rarely "doesn't turn up." Consistently plays very well against the big sides as well.
Sanchez is not the elite player you think he is. There was a poll on a Barca forum 1 month ago whether to get Sanchez back on a free. Almost 50 % said "no" and another 35 % said "only if he accepts the bench". Should tell you a lot from a fanbase that saw him play for them for 3 seasons.
Yeah, I'd still take Sanchez over Hazard at United. Because I feel we need that extra goal threat more than anything else. However, I expect if there was a team of the season vote, more often than not, Hazard would get the nod. Maybe it's because Chelsea are more successful than Arsenal and he's a big part of that, thus the reason that this view is the more popular one.
I find it similar to Ronaldo and Messi. It often comes down to the type of player you prefer to watch and what they do. Obviously don't want to open up a can of worms in this thread, but I'm of the opinion Ronaldo is better than Messi. In a bit more of a minority there, but it's comparable. Messi and Sanchez have better stats if we're going to look at that, but it's close and I prefer the others in question.
Both quality players and around the same level but I'll go with Alexis because I think he's been more consistent than Hazard over the years and has single handily won Arsenal games more than Hazard has with Chelsea.
Actually it's your reasoning that falls completely flat. In fact the sentences you quoted don't even contradict each other. I'd like to see you prove how they do. A) Hazard alone isn't the reason Chelsea or their attack is better. B) Every team improves when their best player is available. Now point out the contradiction there? Thanks.
Chelsea are a better in most areas which is why they win more titles and out perform Arsenal season after season. But somehow despite their mentality, defence, midfield all being better than Arsenal's, the attack is better only because of Hazard. Pointless argument given there are so many variables involved, and the fact that one aspect of the team usually affects another. And since when did Arsenal's attack become "special" without Sanchez? It's clearly not.
I've never thought much of Hazard to be honest, I don't see how he gets talked about as a future Balon D'or winner. However, most other people I know say he's the best player in the Prem.
You mean the last 3 seasons where Hazard was the best player on 2 title winning sides? What am I reading here? In Sanchez's best season in England it was Hazard that won player of the year.
They really aren't that similar as players other than their positions on paper. Sanchez is a highly aggressive goal scorer. Hazard is more of a facilitator whose first instinct isn't to score. Both absolutely top class but not directly comparable in terms of what they do, imo.
Liverpool fans have resorted to overrating ex players now.He's improved a little bit from those times though so their opinions don't hold more weight than all the ones from the PL viewers who have witnessed him become a better player at Arsenal. It'd be like me saying something on the player Hazard used to be at Lille in order to judge the player he is now. Much has changed.
Sanchez!
Better stats on a club level. Better stats for his national team. More direct. Apart from that Hazard is a better dribbler.
Hazard score goals. Sanchez win you games.
Who’s better for United? That’s the important question. I say Sanchez because of his work ethic and character.
Better stats on a club level. Better stats for his national team. More direct. Apart from that Hazard is a better dribbler.
Hazard score goals. Sanchez win you games.
Who’s better for United? That’s the important question. I say Sanchez because of his work ethic and character.
Hazard is better technically. Sanchez asserts himself on games more often from my viewpoint. I voted Hazard but it should be taken with the caveat "if he finds consistency". I'm still waiting for him to score 30+ goals every season. Not sure if he's that type of player. He's also 27 so it's not a case of being young, this is when he should hit his prime as a goal scorer. He might not be that kind of player though. He might be a play maker not a goal scorer who'll get 20+.
Sanchez will score 20+ a season. He's broken the 20 mark (in all competitions) every year bar his second season in which he scored 17. I chose Hazard because he was instrumental in two title wins, but Sanchez has played for a worse team and consistently had better numbers. This is the first time you can judge them comparatively as both are at teams of a similar level. Both have similar stats so second half of the season will tell.
Sanchez will score 20+ a season. He's broken the 20 mark (in all competitions) every year bar his second season in which he scored 17. I chose Hazard because he was instrumental in two title wins, but Sanchez has played for a worse team and consistently had better numbers. This is the first time you can judge them comparatively as both are at teams of a similar level. Both have similar stats so second half of the season will tell.
As the misses is a Chelsea fan I've watched a lot of Hazard, and I've got to say he's probably the best attacking player in the PL when he's on his game. The main problem is that he regularly has ups and downs, he'll be untouchable for a month, then barely turn up to a game for a month (or a whole season in the case of when Jose was last there). I know most of the top class players have that too, but it's all that's separating him from the Balon D'or winners IMO.
That said I've not really watched a lot of Arsenal other than when they're against us, so other than going full muppet on some YouTube vids (in which he regularly looks like a god) it's hard to say. Also Hazard has had better team mates pretty consistently since being in the PL, but then Sanchez appears to have carried Arsenal a few times, so maybe that's actually a testament to him.
Both have the ability to win you games out of the blue and are the sort of players top clubs need to be competing for the biggest trophies. Picking between them is like picking between Jennifer Lawrence and Rachel Riley, although slightly less sexually exciting.
That said I've not really watched a lot of Arsenal other than when they're against us, so other than going full muppet on some YouTube vids (in which he regularly looks like a god) it's hard to say. Also Hazard has had better team mates pretty consistently since being in the PL, but then Sanchez appears to have carried Arsenal a few times, so maybe that's actually a testament to him.
Both have the ability to win you games out of the blue and are the sort of players top clubs need to be competing for the biggest trophies. Picking between them is like picking between Jennifer Lawrence and Rachel Riley, although slightly less sexually exciting.
He was a bad fit for them and was grossly mismanaged on top of it